The BBC has told its journalists not to call Abu Qatada, the al-Qaeda preacher, an “extremist”. In order to avoid making a “value judgment”, the corporation’s managers have ruled that he can only be described as “radical”…A British court has called Qatada a “truly dangerous individual” and even his defence team has suggested he poses a “grave risk” to national security…Daily Telegraph, journalists were told: “Do not call him an extremist –- we must call him a radical. Extremist implies a value judgment.”

For what it’s worth, nineteen audio cassettes of Abu Qatada’s sermons were found in the apartment of one Mohamed Atta some years back.

Is it fair that federal employees receive benefits that are nearly 50% higher than those of private-sector workers whose taxes pay their salaries?…Is it fair that thousands of workers won’t have jobs because the president sided with environmentalists and blocked the shovel-ready Keystone XL oil pipeline?…Is it fair that wind, solar and ethanol producers get billions of dollars of subsidies each year and pay virtually no taxes, while the oil and gas industry — which provides at least 10 times as much energy — pays tens of billions of dollars of taxes while the president complains that it is “subsidized”?…Is it fair that roughly 88% of political contributions from supposedly impartial network television reporters, producers and other employees in 2008 went to Democrats?…Is it fair that our kids and grandkids and great-grandkids — who never voted for Mr. Obama — will have to pay off the $5 trillion of debt accumulated over the past four years, without any benefits to them?

Mr. Moore has compiled quite an extensive list. Life is unfair, JFK famously said (though apparently not always for him during his days in the White House).

Examiner:

White House Press Secretary Jay Carney explained that the number of people dropping out of the work force, which artificially depresses the unemployment rate, can be regarded as an “economic positive.” “A large percentage of that is due to younger people getting more education, which in the end is an economic positive,” Carney said. “This increase in the number of people leaving the work force has been a trend and a fact since 2000, because of an aging population”

This chart tells a different story:

An unemployment rate doesn’t drop two points in a month because kids are staying in school longer. And the amount of the “aging population” still in the workforce is near historic highs, since they can’t afford to retire. Once again we feel like we’re living in a world where it’s Opposite Day from the politicians and their captive media every single day. HT: GP

West wondered Friday. “Is this dramatic supposed decrease in black unemployment a result of job creation or is someone playing around with the census numbers?” Economists reached by The Hill for comment couldn’t fully explain the unemployment rate change for the black community. William Darity, a professor of public policy at Duke University specializing in African-American studies and economics, wrote in an email to The Hill that the decline could have been due to a smaller labor force. He called the drop an “unbelievably dramatic drop” but didn’t rule out the possibility of someone tampering with the numbers; he said there was no evidence one way or the other. “If a large proportion of the persons exiting from the labor force were black (and the exists [sic] presumably were due to people giving up on looking for work) that could drop the black rate without any significant new employment,” Darity wrote. “But a one month drop in the black unemployment rate from 15.8% to 13.6% strikes me as somewhat unprecedented.” President Obama hailed the January unemployment news as a sign that the economy is growing stronger.

As we said, confusing, and not in a good way.

When I visited the House of Lords’ minister, Lord Marland, at the Climate Change Department a couple of years ago, I asked him and the Department’s chief number-cruncher, Professor David Mackay (neither a climate scientist nor an economist, of course) to show me the Department’s calculations detailing just how much “global warming” that might otherwise occur this century would be prevented by the $30 billion per year that the Department was committed to spend between 2011 and 2050 -– $1.2 trillion in all.

There was a horrified silence. The birds stopped singing. The Minister adjusted his tie. The Permanent Secretary looked at his watch. Professor Mackay looked as though he wished the plush sofa into which he was disappearing would swallow him up entirely.

Eventually, in a very small voice, the Professor said, “Er, ah, mphm, that is, oof, arghh, we’ve never done any such calculation.” The biggest tax increase in human history had been based not upon a mature scientific assessment followed by a careful economic appraisal, but solely upon blind faith. I said as much. “Well,” said the Professor, “maybe we’ll get around to doing the calculations next October.” They still haven’t done the calculations -– or, rather, I suspect they have done them but have kept the results very quiet

The environment minister of Northern Ireland weighed in on related matters a few years ago.

The Labor Department reported a loss of 2,689,000 jobs in January…In January 2010, as I said, there was an actual, unadjusted job loss of 2,858,000 jobs. To make it simple, the government computers were expecting a bigger unadjusted loss than the 2,689,000 jobs because last January’s decline was 2,858,000. Why weren’t there as many job losses this January? Very likely because the weather throughout the country is a lot milder this year than during the past two Januarys. A loss of jobs that isn’t as bad as expected turns into a job gain. Does that mean there really are 243,000 new jobs out there? Absolutely not.

Let’s say there are rumors in your company that 300 people are going to be laid off. Instead, management decides to fire just 200. Two hundred people, of course, have lost their jobs. But, adjusting it for expectations, 100 people didn’t get fired. Using this analogy, the government would say that, on an expectation-adjusted basis, 100 jobs were created. That’s sort of what happened in the January employment report because of seasonal adjustment.

Let’s get this straight. Jobs went down 2.7 million instead of 2.9 million in January and this is a job gain of 243,000 jobs? Okay. The labor force lost 1.7 million people, which trnslated into a seasonally adjusted 1.2 million people, so the labor force participation rate continued its drop to historic lows among prime age workers.

Meanwhile, the actual non-seasonally adjusted jobs number for December and January is a loss of 2.9 million jobs (which the BLS translated, using a methodology that we were unable to determine, into a job gain of 446,000 jobs). And these jobs losses and labor force losses are a cause for celebration? Huh? It’s all kind of confusing to us, and not in a good way.

Zero hedge claims that 1.2 million Americans somehow dropped out of the labor force in one month. If that’s true, it’s both interesting and very odd indeed. What could be going on?

We haven’t had much to say recently of a partisan nature, because really, it’s just awful out there, and boring too. Here’s a change of pace, however, with some cleverness added into the mix. The little sub-messages are a nice touch. HT: Ace

Sugar and other sweeteners are, in fact, so toxic to the human body that they should be regulated as strictly as alcohol by governments worldwide, according to a commentary in the current issue of the journal Nature by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF). The researchers propose regulations such as taxing all foods and drinks that include added sugar, banning sales in or near schools and placing age limits on purchases…

In the United States, more than two-thirds of the population is overweight, and half of them are obese. About 80 percent of those who are obese will have diabetes or metabolic disorders and will have shortened lives, according to the UCSF authors of the commentary, led by Robert Lustig. And about 75 percent of U.S. health-care dollars are spent on diet-related diseases, the authors said. Worldwide, the obese now greatly outnumber the undernourished…

Lustig, a medical doctor in UCSF’s Department of Pediatrics, compares added sugar to tobacco and alcohol (coincidentally made from sugar) in that it is addictive, toxic and has a negative impact on society, thus meeting established public health criteria for regulation. Lustig advocates a consumer tax on any product with added sugar…ban the sale of sugary drinks to children under age 17 and to tighten zoning laws for the sale of sugary beverages and snacks around schools and in low-income areas

In a country where the EPA has issued an endangerment finding about a gas that is necessary for life to exist on earth, it is possible to imagine the government requiring a photo ID and a prescription to buy a bag of sugar. How life has changed in the last half century, and in many ways not for the better.

Officials in southern China appear to have averted environmental calamity by halting the spread of a toxic metal that had threatened to foul drinking water for tens of millions of people, the state media reported Monday. Officials said they had successfully diluted the concentration of cadmium, a poisonous component of batteries, that has been coursing down the Longjiang River…

half the nation’s rivers and lakes are unfit for human contact, and news reports of chemical and oil spills are commonplace here. Although the central government has invested more than $3 billion to improve water quality in recent years, officials estimate that more than 300 million people still do not have access to clean drinking water…

10 percent of the nation’s rice crop contained excessive cadmium levels. In several southern provinces, 60 percent of rice samples were found to exceed the national standard for the heavy metal…“Only when fish started dying did they publicly acknowledge there was a problem,” Mr. Ma said.

In China they have Real Pollution. In the US we have not had serious pollution problems in decades; instead we now have pretend pollution, and Americans are so mal-educated that they don’t even know it. 16 of the 20 dirtiest cities in the world are in China. The country’s water is appalling. And how about the great taste of melamine?

Meanwhile, in the US, we have geniuses like this: “Think about the amount of money that China has spent on infrastructure. Their ports, their train systems, their airports are vastly the superior to us now.” The US has 20,000 airports, while China has fewer than 200 for civilian use. Some infrastructure! Some genius!

There was no incentive to work hard — to go out to the fields early, to put in extra effort, Yen Jingchang says. “Work hard, don’t work hard — everyone gets the same,” he says. “So people don’t want to work.” In Xiaogang there was never enough food, and the farmers often had to go to other villages to beg. Their children were going hungry. They were desperate. So, in the winter of 1978, after another terrible harvest, they came up with an idea: Rather than farm as a collective, each family would get to farm its own plot of land. If a family grew a lot of food, that family could keep some of the harvest…

Despite the risks, they decided they had to try this experiment — and to write it down as a formal contract, so everyone would be bound to it. By the light of an oil lamp, Yen Hongchang wrote out the contract. The farmers agreed to divide up the land among the families. Each family agreed to turn over some of what they grew to the government, and to the collective. And, crucially, the farmers agreed that families that grew enough food would get to keep some for themselves. The contract also recognized the risks the farmers were taking. If any of the farmers were sent to prison or executed, it said, the others in the group would care for their children until age 18…

by changing the economic rules — by saying, you get to keep some of what you grow — everything changed. At the end of the season, they had an enormous harvest: more, Yen Hongchang says, than in the previous five years combined. That huge harvest gave them away…

fortunately for Mr. Yen and the other farmers, at this moment in history, there were powerful people in the Communist Party who wanted to change China’s economy. Deng Xiaoping, the Chinese leader who would go on to create China’s modern economy, was just coming to power. So instead of executing the Xiaogang farmers, the Chinese leaders ultimately decided to hold them up as a model. Within a few years, farms all over China adopted the principles in that secret document. People could own what they grew. The government launched other economic reforms, and China’s economy started to grow like crazy. Since 1978, something like 500 million people have risen out of poverty in China.

In 1623 William Bradford figured out the same thing after the Pilgrims spent two years on their communal farms: “they began to think how they might raise as much corn as they could…so assigned to every family a parcel of land, according to the proportion of their number…and ranged all boys and youth under some family. This had very good success, for it made all hands very industrious…The women now went willingly into the field, and took their little ones with them to set corn; which before would allege weakness and inability.”

It is of note that terrible hardships preceded the discovery of simple truths. In the case of China, tens of millions of people died over decades in service of Mao’s utopian fantasies. In Plymouth it took them three hard years to figure out how to deal with the freeloaders. Small wonder that in our world today, ideas that have lived off a lazy prosperity, like green energy and global warming, are having some problems of their own.

the number of scientific “heretics” is growing with each passing year. The reason is a collection of stubborn scientific facts. Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is the lack of global warming for well over 10 years now. This is known to the warming establishment, as one can see from the 2009 “Climategate” email of climate scientist Kevin Trenberth: “The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t.” But the warming is only missing if one believes computer models where so-called feedbacks involving water vapor and clouds greatly amplify the small effect of CO2.

The lack of warming for more than a decade — indeed, the smaller-than-predicted warming over the 22 years since the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) began issuing projections — suggests that computer models have greatly exaggerated how much warming additional CO2 can cause. Faced with this embarrassment, those promoting alarm have shifted their drumbeat from warming to weather extremes, to enable anything unusual that happens in our chaotic climate to be ascribed to CO2.

The fact is that CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is a colorless and odorless gas, exhaled at high concentrations by each of us, and a key component of the biosphere’s life cycle. Plants do so much better with more CO2 that greenhouse operators often increase the CO2 concentrations by factors of three or four to get better growth. This is no surprise since plants and animals evolved when CO2 concentrations were about 10 times larger than they are today. Better plant varieties, chemical fertilizers and agricultural management contributed to the great increase in agricultural yields of the past century, but part of the increase almost certainly came from additional CO2 in the atmosphere.

Although the number of publicly dissenting scientists is growing, many young scientists furtively say that while they also have serious doubts about the global-warming message, they are afraid to speak up for fear of not being promoted — or worse. They have good reason to worry. In 2003, Dr. Chris de Freitas, the editor of the journal Climate Research, dared to publish a peer-reviewed article with the politically incorrect (but factually correct) conclusion that the recent warming is not unusual in the context of climate changes over the past thousand years. The international warming establishment quickly mounted a determined campaign to have Dr. de Freitas removed from his editorial job and fired from his university position. Fortunately, Dr. de Freitas was able to keep his university job.

This is not the way science is supposed to work, but we have seen it before — for example, in the frightening period when Trofim Lysenko hijacked biology in the Soviet Union. Soviet biologists who revealed that they believed in genes, which Lysenko maintained were a bourgeois fiction, were fired

The list of heretics is getting pretty long now.

As you can see, almost no one — a mere 2% of those polled — thinks income inequality is a priority compared to the economy generally. Here’s why:

Want to be a leveler? Good luck with that.

Hardly anyone asked whether lax mortgage lending would trigger a broad financial crisis, because America had not experienced a broad financial crisis since the Great Depression. A true financial crisis differs from falling stock prices, which are common. A financial crisis involves the failure of banks or other institutions, panic in many markets and a pervasive loss of wealth and confidence. Such a crisis was not within the personal experience of members of the FOMC — or anyone. Nor was it part of mainstream economic thinking. Because it hadn’t happened in decades, it was assumed that it couldn’t happen. There had been previous real estate busts. From 1964 to 1966, new housing starts fell 24 percent; from 1972 to 1975, 51 percent; from 1979 to 1982, 39 percent; from 1988 to 1991, 32 percent. Declining home construction had fed economic slowdowns or recessions. So the natural question seemed: Would this happen now? The answer seemed “no”…

There’s a paradox to economic policy. The more it succeeds at prolonging short-term prosperity, the more it inspires long-run destabilizing behavior by businesses, banks, consumers, investors and government. If they think basic stability is assured, they will assume greater risks — loosen credit standards, borrow more, engage in more speculation, relax wage and price behavior — that ultimately make the economy less stable. Long booms threaten deep busts. Since World War II, this has happened twice. In the 1960s, the so-called “new economics” promised that, by manipulating the budget and interest rates, it could stifle business cycles. The ensuing boom spanned the 1960s; the bust extended to the early 1980s and included inflation of 13 percent, four recessions and peak monthly unemployment of 10.8 percent. The latest episode was the so-called Great Moderation, largely paralleling Greenspan’s Fed tenure (1987-2006), when there were only two mild recessions (1990-91 and 2001). We are now in the bust. The Fed slept mainly because it overlooked the possibility of boom-bust.

(We certainly did not understand what was happening when we first noticed the sub-prime mortgage market in early 2007. Nor did we understand it well when the Bear Stearns conference call tanked the market in August of that year.) We think there’s another factor that was in play as well: computer models. Recall that the largest investment banks were allowed to write their own capital rules at this time by the government, because they were so smart and had very sophisticated computer models showing that they had excess capital even at ratios as low as 4-5%. GIGO as it turned out.

The latest vessel is Newt Gingrich, obviously flawed in many ways. But take a moment to read what he’s saying. It’s less the messenger than the message that has the power. We think that GOP primary voters believe that a minimally acceptable candidate articulating that message clearly and unapologetically is electable by a sizeable majority of voters. After all, in the wake of the ridiculous Keystone decision, even staunch liberals are shaking their heads about the disastrous course the administration has set for the country. We don’t recall a recent analogy to this bubbling up of opinion from the grass roots. (Eugene McCarthy’s strong losing performance in the 1968 New Hampshire primary comes to mind.) If the insiders don’t quite get what is going on, it wouldn’t be the first time.

To illustrate just how wide the gap has grown between the new upper class and the new lower class, let me start with the broader upper-middle and working classes from which they are drawn, using two fictional neighborhoods that I hereby label Belmont (after an archetypal upper-middle-class suburb near Boston) and Fishtown (after a neighborhood in Philadelphia that has been home to the white working class since the Revolution).

To be assigned to Belmont, the people in the statistical nationwide databases on which I am drawing must have at least a bachelor’s degree and work as a manager, physician, attorney, engineer, architect, scientist, college professor or content producer in the media. To be assigned to Fishtown, they must have no academic degree higher than a high-school diploma. If they work, it must be in a blue-collar job, a low-skill service job such as cashier, or a low-skill white-collar job such as mail clerk or receptionist.

People who qualify for my Belmont constitute about 20% of the white population of the U.S., ages 30 to 49. People who qualify for my Fishtown constitute about 30% of the white population of the U.S., ages 30 to 49. I specify white, meaning non-Latino white, as a way of clarifying how broad and deep the cultural divisions in the U.S. have become. Cultural inequality is not grounded in race or ethnicity. I specify ages 30 to 49 — what I call prime-age adults — to make it clear that these trends are not explained by changes in the ages of marriage or retirement. In Belmont and Fishtown, here’s what happened to America’s common culture between 1960 and 2010.

Marriage: In 1960, extremely high proportions of whites in both Belmont and Fishtown were married — 94% in Belmont and 84% in Fishtown. In the 1970s, those percentages declined about equally in both places. Then came the great divergence. In Belmont, marriage stabilized during the mid-1980s, standing at 83% in 2010. In Fishtown, however, marriage continued to slide; as of 2010, a minority (just 48%) were married. The gap in marriage between Belmont and Fishtown grew to 35 percentage points, from just 10.

Single parenthood: Another aspect of marriage — the percentage of children born to unmarried women — showed just as great a divergence. Though politicians and media eminences are too frightened to say so, nonmarital births are problematic. On just about any measure of development you can think of, children who are born to unmarried women fare worse than the children of divorce and far worse than children raised in intact families. This unwelcome reality persists even after controlling for the income and education of the parents. In 1960, just 2% of all white births were nonmarital. When we first started recording the education level of mothers in 1970, 6% of births to white women with no more than a high-school education — women, that is, with a Fishtown education — were out of wedlock. By 2008, 44% were nonmarital. Among the college-educated women of Belmont, less than 6% of all births were out of wedlock as of 2008, up from 1% in 1970.

Industriousness: The norms for work and women were revolutionized after 1960, but the norm for men putatively has remained the same: Healthy men are supposed to work. In practice, though, that norm has eroded everywhere. In Fishtown, the change has been drastic. (To avoid conflating this phenomenon with the latest recession, I use data collected in March 2008 as the end point for the trends.) The primary indicator of the erosion of industriousness in the working class is the increase of prime-age males with no more than a high school education who say they are not available for work — they are “out of the labor force.” That percentage went from a low of 3% in 1968 to 12% in 2008. Twelve percent may not sound like much until you think about the men we’re talking about: in the prime of their working lives, their 30s and 40s, when, according to hallowed American tradition, every American man is working or looking for work. Almost one out of eight now aren’t. Meanwhile, not much has changed among males with college educations. Only 3% were out of the labor force in 2008…

“The more opulent citizens take great care not to stand aloof from the people,” wrote Alexis de Tocqueville, the great chronicler of American democracy, in the 1830s. “On the contrary, they constantly keep on easy terms with the lower classes: They listen to them, they speak to them every day.” Americans love to see themselves this way. But there’s a problem: It’s not true anymore, and it has been progressively less true since the 1960s.

From the WSJ a couple of years ago: “the CDC reported that about 40% of American children were born out of wedlock in 2007, more than triple the 11% who were in 1970.” It seems clear enough to us that the government has to stop subsidizing this sort of behavior or fairly soon the country will be in an even bigger mess than it is now.

So many people who are so concerned about jobs, about medical costs, about the everyday parts of life, and who feel that the elites in Washington and New York have no understanding, no care, no concern, no reliability, and in fact do not represent them at all.

In the last two debates we had…where people reacted so strongly to the news media, I think it was something very fundamental that I wish that the powers that be in the news media would take seriously. The American people feel that they have elites who have been trying for a half century to force us to quit being American and to become some kind of other system, and the reaction…People completely misunderstand what’s going on. It’s not that I am a good debater, it’s that I articulate the deepest held views of the American people…

If Barack Obama can get reelected after this disaster, just think how radical he would be in a second term…there are a number of key issues we have to talk about with the President. I believe this campaign comes down to economics, including jobs, economic growth, balancing the budget, the value of money, comes down to national security, what threatens us and what to do about it, but the centerpiece of this campaign is about American exceptionalism versus the radicalism of Saul Alinsky…

What we are going to argue is that American exceptionalism, the Declaration of Independence, the American Constitution, the American Federalist Papers, the Founding Fathers of America are the source from which we draw our understanding of America. He draws his from the Saul Alinsky, the radical left-wingers, and people who don’t like the classical America…

One of the keys issues, and I’m prepared to take this straight to the President and frankly, straight to the elite media…is the growing anti-religious bigotry of the elites…The second big theme that every South Carolinian understands is jobs, economic growth…I want to go into every neighborhood of every ethnic background in the country and say to the people very simply, if you want your children to have a life of dependency and food stamps, you have a candidate and that’s Barack Obama. If you want your children to have a life of indepedency and paychecks, you have a candidate and that’s Newt Gingrich…

Part of our long-term security interests is having an American energy policy. I want America to become so energy independent that no American President ever again bows to a Saudi King. Let me give you an example of a common sense conservatism that solves problems. You have well over $29 billion of natural gas offshore. As President I will authorize on the very first day the development of it. That natural gas will create jobs that, in Louisiana, average $80,000 apiece. In addition, it generates royalties. Part of the royalties should be used to modernize the port of Charleston, which affects 1 out of every 5 jobs in South Carolina.

But it’s not enough just to find the money. The Corps of Engineers bureaucracy is so long and so stupid that they currently take 8 years to study, not to do the project but to study the project. We fought the entire Second World War in 3 years and 8 months. Now if you can beat Nazi Germany, fascist Italy and Imperial Japan in 3 years and 8 months, it is almost unimaginable that it now takes 8 years to study the project…

The President’s decision to veto the Keystone pipeline…you have to wonder how out-of-touch with reality this administration is…The President says, no, we don’t want you to build a pipeline from central Canada straight down, with no mountains intervening, to the largest petrochemical center in the world, Houston, so that we would make money on the pipeline, we would make money on managing the pipeline, we would make money on refining the oil, and we would make money in the ports of Galveston and Houston shipping the oil.

Oh no, we don’t want to do that because Barack Obama is taking care of his extremist left-wing friends in San Francisco. They think that will really stop the oil from getting out. No. Prime Minister Harper…is going to cut a deal with the Chinese, and they will build a pipeline straight across the Rockies to Vancouver. We will get none of the jobs, none of the energy, none of the opportunity. An American President who can create a Chinese-Canadian partnership is truly a danger to this country.

Gingrich certainly owes a great deal to the much-reviled media, and possibly to Romney’s mishandling of his tax issue. More surprises ahead no doubt, but even Romney partisans know that important changes are needed, and quick.

Beck Laxton, 46, and partner Kieran Cooper, 44, have spent half the decade concealing the gender of their son, Sasha. “I wanted to avoid all that stereotyping,” Laxton said in an interview with the Cambridge News. “Stereotypes seem fundamentally stupid. Why would you want to slot people into boxes?…Sasha dresses in clothes he likes — be it a hand-me-downs from his sister or his brother. The big no-no’s are hyper-masculine outfits like skull-print shirts and cargo pants.

In one photo, sent to friends and family, Sasha’s dressed in a shiny pink girl’s swimsuit. “Children like sparkly things,” says Beck. “And if someone thought Sasha was a girl because he was wearing a pink swimming costume, then what effect would that have?”…

When Sasha turned five and headed to school, Laxton was forced to make her son’s sex public. That meant Sasha would have to get used to being a boy in the eyes of his peers. Still, his mom is intervening. While the school requires different uniforms for boys and girls, Sasha wears a girl’s blouse with his pants.

Makes us want to play matchmaker. Look, almost anything’s better to comment on than the drip, drip, drip of the primary season, or the appalling situation in Washington.

Obama’s Jobs Council reminded the nation that it is still hooked on fossil fuels, and will be for a long time. “Continuing to deliver inexpensive and reliable energy,” the council reported, “is going to require the United States to optimize all of its natural resources and construct pathways (pipelines, transmission and distribution) to deliver electricity and fuel.” It added that regulatory “and permitting obstacles that could threaten the development of some energy projects, negatively impact jobs and weaken our energy infrastructure need to be addressed.” Mr. Obama’s Jobs Council could start by calling out…the Obama administration…

We almost hope this was a political call because, on the substance, there should be no question. Without the pipeline, Canada would still export its bitumen — with long-term trends in the global market, it’s far too valuable to keep in the ground — but it would go to China. And, as a State Department report found, U.S. refineries would still import low-quality crude — just from the Middle East. Stopping the pipeline, then, wouldn’t do anything to reduce global warming, but it would almost certainly require more oil to be transported across oceans in tankers.

WaPo columnist Robert Samuelson is a little less diplomatic:

rejection of the Keystone XL pipeline from Canada to the Gulf of Mexico is an act of national insanity. It isn’t often that a president makes a decision that has no redeeming virtues and — beyond the symbolism — won’t even advance the goals of the groups that demanded it…environmentalists won’t get much. Stopping the pipeline won’t halt the development of tar sands, to which the Canadian government is committed; therefore, there will be little effect on global warming emissions. Indeed, Obama’s decision might add to them. If Canada builds a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific for export to Asia, moving all that oil across the ocean by tanker will create extra emissions. There will also be the risk of added spills…

consider how Obama’s decision hurts the United States. For starters, it insults and antagonizes a strong ally; getting future Canadian cooperation on other issues will be harder. Next, it threatens a large source of relatively secure oil that, combined with new discoveries in the United States, could reduce (though not eliminate) our dependence on insecure foreign oil.

Finally, Obama’s decision forgoes all the project’s jobs. There’s some dispute over the magnitude. Project sponsor TransCanada claims 20,000, split between construction (13,000) and manufacturing (7,000) of everything from pumps to control equipment. Apparently, this refers to “job years,” meaning one job for one year. If so, the actual number of jobs would be about half that spread over two years. Whatever the figure, it’s in the thousands and important in a country hungering for work. And Keystone XL is precisely the sort of infrastructure project that Obama claims to favor.

The big winners are the Chinese. They must be celebrating their good fortune and wondering how the crazy Americans could repudiate such a huge supply of nearby energy.

Speaking of China, Chairman Mao wanted people to put steel mills in their back yards. Very practical. In the new fantasy America we have now, everyone should put a Solyndra in their back yards, and there should be personalized high-speed rail service connecting every home in the country,

As VDH says, and as we have written as well, Americans don’t know much about the world that existed in the days of Adams and Eliot. The world seems magic now, because of technology; it hardly was magic back then.

The ignorance is not just sad, it’s actually perilous. To take a mundane example, technology has permitted the elimination of inventory everywhere in the global supply chain. How large are the buffer inventories of gasoline, fruits and vegetables, meat, canned goods, and so forth, in case some serious disruptions should occur? A month or two, like the SPR? What happens when the gas and the cheeseburgers run out after that?

Charles Eliot advocated a new curriculum in higher education that focused on specialization. This time in our view would benefit by more respect for the generalist of 1854. It is colossally arrogant to think that there will not be a breakdown in the supply chain at some point. And the consequences of arrogance are not pretty. If there’s a Plan B for the US in such a crisis, we haven’t heard of it. And offshoring so much of America’s needs to foreign lands heightens the risks in our perilous present.

The first container ship reached Charleston in 1966, carrying 600 containers. Today the port receives ships carrying more than 9,000. By 2014 there will be 1,200 “post-Panamax” ships — marvels of naval architecture, floating mountains — built for commerce after the canal widening. They will carry up to 18,000 containers. The widening, says Jim Newsome, CEO of the South Carolina State Ports Authority, will be “the biggest game-changer in the history of containerization”…70 percent of imports from Asia arrive at West Coast ports and are distributed inland by truck and rail. But shipping is the cheapest transportation per mile and will become cheaper with post-Panamax ships, including those coming here.

Newsome says the study for deepening Savannah’s harbor was made in 1999. It is 2012, and studies for the environmental impact statement are not finished. When they are, the project will take five years to construct. “But before that,” he says laconically, “they’re going to be sued by groups concerned about the environmental impact.” A Newsome axiom — that institutions become risk-averse as they get challenged — is increasingly pertinent as America changes from a nation that celebrated getting things done to a nation that celebrates people and groups who prevent things from being done.

Newsome says that because of labor costs — in constructing and crewing ships — America has essentially no deep-sea shipping industry. This is a facet of the de-industrialization of the nation.

The world’s tallest building took 14 months to build in 1930 in NYC. Now the same task takes at least 10x as long in NYC — if they’re lucky. How pathetic.

Many years ago we had the good fortune to meet a man who was present as a child at one of the precipitating events of the Great Depression, the failure of New York’s Bank of the United States in December 1930. His grandfather, who lost his savings in that bank, took him to witness the scene as depositors thronged to bank doors that were locked during normal business hours. The panic from bank failures in New York and elsewhere spread around the country — there was no deposit insurance — driving banks to maximize liquidity, sell assets, foreclose loans, and create the Mother of All Credit Crunches, which became known as the Great Depression. Here’s how the NYT described the scene in its December 12, 1930 city edition:

Perhaps you have been taught that the stock market crash of 1929 caused the Great Depression. That is not so. The crash both reflected and amplified the recession that the US economy was entering in 1929; however, it was the problems of the banking system and of monetary policy that cascaded recession into depression. We will quote from Friedman and Schwartz’s Monetary History of the United States (from pp. 309-313):

The stock market crash…left no mark on currency held by the public. Its direct financial effect was confined to the stock market and did not arouse any distrust of banks by their depositors.

The stock market crash coincided with a stepping up of the rate of economic decline. During the two months from the cyclical peak in August 1929 to the crash, production, wholesale prices, and personal income fell at annual rates of 20%, 7.5%, and 5%, respectively. In the next twelve months, all three series fell at appreciably higher rates…Even if the contraction had come to an end in late 1930 or early 1931, as it might have done in the absence of the monetary collapse that was to ensue, it would have ranked as one of the more severe contractions on record….

In October 1930, the monetary character of the contraction changed dramatically…A crop of bank failures, particularly in Indiana, Illinois, Iowa, Arkansas, and North Carolina, led to widespread attempts to convert demand and time deposits into currency…A contagion of fear spread among depositors…such contagion knows no geographical limits. The failure of 256 banks with $180 million in deposits in November 1930 was followed by the failure of 352 with over $370 million of deposits in December…the most dramatic being the failure on December 11 of the Bank of the United States with over $200 million of deposits.

That failure was of especial importance. The Bank of the United States was the largest commercial bank, as measured by volume of deposits, ever to have failed up to that time in US history. Moreover, though an ordinary commercial bank, its name had led many at home and abroad to regard it as somehow an official bank, hence its failure constituted more of a blow to confidence than would have been administered by the fall of a bank with a less distinctive name.

In addition it was a member of the Federal Reserve System. The withdrawal of support by the Clearing House banks from the concerted measures sponsored by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to save the bank — measures of a kind the banking community had often taken in similar circumstances in the past — was a serious blow to the System’s prestige…

Friedman implies that the reason that the Clearing House banks failed to bail out the Bank of the United States, despite often intervening in other, similar cases, is that the BoUS’s customer base and board were Jewish. This contention seems to be supported by statements from the NY State Banking Commissioner of that time, Joseph A. Broderick (p. 310). Let’s take a look at how the New York Times reported the attendees of the meeting the day before the Clearing House pulled the plug on the Bank of the United States:

We have no way of knowing if Milton Friedman’s contention is true or not, though it appears likely to us that, unlike Herbert H. Lehman, the “small, able” Mr. Isidor J. Kresel was probably not a member of Our Crowd. TIME Magazine summed up the banking community’s view of the Bank of the United States in its December 22, 1930 issue on that fateful meeting:

Another late arrival was lanky Owen D. Young who came about 11 p.m. in full dress, accompanied by Thomas William Lamont of J. P. Morgan & Co. Looking taller than usual in his full dress, Mr. Young paused to peer down at and converse with small, able Isidor Kresel, counsel for Bank of United States…Conservative Manhattan bankers last week were angry at Bernard K. Marcus, dark-haired, heavily-built president of Bank of United States. His aim was perhaps much too high. Only last year he stated: “Often we’ve put two or three days work into one. We have gone ahead two or three times as fast as we would have had we been working only one day at a time.” To bankers, a day’s work is a day’s work, to be done well, thoroughly.

(The tall and lanky in full dress versus the small, able, dark-haired, overreaching, and heavily-built. We get the picture. Thanks, TIME.) This piece has been quite educational to research. We see once again that great events can turn on small episodes of human weakness, prejudice and folly. And who knew at the time that a crowd gathered at a bank on a cold December day would become anything other than the “local” event that the head of the NY Clearing House opined that it would be?

We should not believe that we can’t make mistakes of similar magnitude or wrongheadedness again. The stagflation of the 1970′s was caused by foolish economics policies of three presidents in a row — Nixon, Ford, and Carter — that weren’t reversed for a decade until Ronald Reagan and Paul Volcker had the wisdom and courage to take the harsh steps required to kill inflation. The greatest folly can seem trivial or reasonable at the time, which is precisely why it is so dangerous. Fortunately, even many of the people who rhetorically blast TARP today, chose to back it when push came to shove.

“China is expecting foreign trade growth to slow this year to around 10 percent amid a grim outlook for exports…Last year, China’s foreign trade grew 22.5 percent to $3.6 trillion…exports in December rose 13.4 percent, down slightly from November’s growth rate.” And from Bloomberg, “Growth may ‘trough’ at 7.5 percent in the three months through March and 7.6 percent in the second quarter.”

As China’s growth slows, the problems will become more obvious. The overleverage problem. The housing bust. The political fissures. The issues that PPP obscures. The urban unemployment problem. The regional governments problem. The empty cities problem. Stay tuned.

When the companies that supply motor fuel close the books on 2011, they will pay about $6.8 million in penalties to the Treasury because they failed to mix a special type of biofuel into their gasoline and diesel as required by law…the ingredient, cellulosic biofuel, does not exist…while it may seem harsh that the Environmental Protection Agency is penalizing them for failing to do the impossible, the agency is being lenient by the standards of the law, the 2007 Energy Independence and Security Act…

The goal set by the law for vehicle fuel from cellulose was 250 million gallons for 2011 and 500 million gallons for 2012. (These are small numbers relative to the American fuel market; the E.P.A. estimates that gasoline sales in 2012 will amount to about 135 billion gallons, and highway diesel, about 51 billion gallons.)

Note the date: 2007. It’s a bi-partisan clownfest, raising costs and complicating business in service of a trivial amelioration of an imaginary problem. Fortunately, there’s not a single shred of evidence that over-regulating the private sector hurts job creation.

IBD:

According to the BLS, the “labor force participation rate” — the ratio of the number of people either working or looking for work compared with the entire working-age population — is now 64%, down from 65.7% when the recession ended in June 2009. That’s the lowest level since women began entering the workforce in far greater numbers several decades ago. If you adjust for this drop, the unemployment rate would be close to 11%, instead of the official 8.5%.

Of course this has been the case for a long time now. Imagine how the media would be reporting unemployment, and indeed, will be reporting unemployment, if the White House changes hands this year.

Obama made several recess appointments — a tactic that as a senator he once criticized — even though Congress was not in recess. In December, the president signed a $1 billion omnibus spending bill, but notified Congress that he might not abide by some of the very provisions he had just signed into law. During the Libya war, Obama felt that bombing Qaddafi’s forces did not really constitute military operations, and therefore he had no need to notify Congress under the War Powers Act. It is clear that Arizona is not trying to circumvent federal immigration law, but rather is desperately trying to find some way to enforce it, given that the Obama administration has selectively chosen not to do so. In response, the federal government is suing the state of Arizona, even as it assures illegal aliens that they will not be arrested if they have not committed a crime — as if Obama can by himself decide that illegally entering and residing in the United States is not a federal crime in the first place. President Obama argued that it was constitutional to force citizens to purchase federalized health care, and that all Americans would be subject to his new health-care law — except some 2,000 businesses and organizations that were given politically driven waivers. Obama decided to reverse the legal order of creditors in the bailout of a bankrupt Chrysler Corporation in favor of more politically suitable constituencies. The administration does not like the Defense of Marriage Act, and therefore announced that it won’t enforce it. When a federal judge struck down an Obama- administration ban on new leases for gas and oil drilling in the Gulf of Mexico, Obama for a time ignored the injunction. When a BP oil leak in the Gulf outraged America, the president met with company executives and announced that they had agreed to set up a $20 billion “fund” to pay for imminent damage claims — as if our chief executive now meets with culpable private businesses to assess what he thinks they should pony up to avoid federal retaliation…

on any given challenge Obama assesses the politics of favoring his constituency of the “poor” and “middle class,” and then uses the necessary legal gymnastics post facto to offer the veneer of lawfulness. If someone is breaking a federal “law” by entering Arizona illegally from Mexico, there must be a way to make the enforcer of that “law” the real suspect — given that a Sheriff Joe Arpaio is by allegiance of the privileged 1 percent and those whom he arrests most surely are not. Consumers are deemed to need federal help more than do lenders; accordingly, Congress “really” is now in recess. In other words, we are witnessing with this administration the ancient idea of the supposedly exalted ends justifying the somewhat ambiguous means — albeit dressed up in trendy Ivy League legalese and progressive moralizing. Our postmodern president is not content with just picking and choosing which laws he will follow in advancing his social agenda. The war against the myth of disinterested Western jurisprudence extends also to free-market economics, as we see with the monotonous demonization of the so-called 1 percent and those who make over $200,000 per year. Sometime after January 2009, we learned that the “wealthy” did not gain their riches by a wide variety of what we once thought were legitimate means — luck, inheritance, work, health, intelligence, expertise, experience, education, or an overriding desire for money and status, coupled with an avoidance of classical sins like sloth, crime, and drunkenness. Rather, we were taught that there was something else going on, something innately unfair in the manner in which we are arbitrarily compensated. In some sense, we are back to the old notion of a labor theory of value (e.g., an hour of working at Starbucks is inherently no less valuable to our society in terms of how much the worker should be paid than an hour crafting a deal at Goldman Sachs). The role, then, of government is not to ensure an equality of opportunity — which is impossible, given inherent and unending race, class, and gender exploitations — but to strive for an equality of result. That utopian task demands that the best and the brightest in government redistribute capital, or rather use the state to make right what the private sector has distorted.

And this from the head of one of our political parties: “The discourse in America, the discourse in Congress in particular…has really changed, I’ll tell you. I hesitate to place blame, but I have noticed it take a very precipitous turn towards edginess and lack of civility with the growth of the Tea Party movement.” Already, “the Department of Homeland has been operating a ‘Social Networking/Media Capability’ program to monitor the top blogs, forums and social networks online for at least the past 18 months.” Hard to imagine what 2013-2017 America is going to look like if these folks aren’t shown the door.

The WSJ discusses Bain Capital’s investments:

22% either filed for bankruptcy reorganization or closed their doors by the end of the eighth year after Bain first invested, sometimes with substantial job losses. An additional 8% ran into so much trouble that all of the money Bain invested was lost…Bain produced about $2.5 billion in gains for its investors in the 77 deals, on about $1.1 billion invested. Overall, Bain recorded roughly 50% to 80% annual gains in this period, which experts said was among the best track records for buyout firms

Here are a few thoughts on the non-VC PE industry. KKR was started in 1976. and initally capitalized on low stock market valuations to take companies private at very low EBITDA multiples. Excellent idea. Around the same time the mainstreaming of hostile takeovers by Morgan Stanley’s Bob Greenhill and attorney Joe Flom meant that a going-private transaction did not have to be voluntary. (We once attended a meeting with a public company director who pleaded that we find someone to do a hostile takeover of his company because the CEO was so awful.)

The emergence of Mike Milken’s junk bonds in the 1980′s accelerated going-private transactions. In addition, acquirors had the ability to allocate basis among subsidiaries of the acquiree (“mirrors“) so that they paid no taxes on the operations they sold off to pay down debt. An attorney famous for defending targets of the takeovers called them junk-bond, bust-up, bootstrap deals. These developments arguably contributed to CEO’s being better stewards of public company assets. Bain Capital was founded in 1984, towards the end of the first phase of large PE deals. It looks as though the firm did start-up and growth capital deals at first and migrated into troubled situations sometimes referred to as vulture capital.

We’ve never done business with Bain Capital, though we’ve been involved as an agent and principal in the PE business for several decades. It has been our general observation that bankers and finance guys generally don’t know too much about business operations, but business operations get translated into numbers, and they know the numbers. It has surprised us that PE has been portrayed as both the Second Coming and the Devil’s Spawn by elements within the GOP. It’s neither of course.

We agree that the young-rich know-nothing banker with his 2+20 cap-gains-on-the-carry compensation scheme creates an image issue. But there’s this on the other side after all. As MoDo wrote, “a prospective race between Barack Obama and Mitt Romney is being caricatured here as ‘Saul Alinsky versus Gordon Gekko’.” We agree with roughly 50% of that.

Depp & Burton Attend Whitehouse Halloween Party ~- President Barack Obama and first lady Michelle Obama on Saturday handed out treats to more than 2,000 trick-or-treaters, marking their Halloween at a White House event partly aimed at honoring military families. Johnny Depp & Tim Burton were amoung the attendess at the Whitehouse Halloween Party and apparently Johnny was very popular with the children because of his Jack Sparrow character from Pirates Of The Caribbean. It is not known yet if Depp & Burton dressed up for the Party but we do know there was some characters from The Night Before Christmas and apparently a tea party with the Mad Hatter….could this have been Johnny Depp?

(Since this report came from a dedicated fansite, it missed or overlooked Chewbacca’s attendance at the fancy party.) This tiny story serves to illustrate that the media are even more pathetic, unprofessional and subservient than we thought.

A new state law requires those who buy drain cleaners and other caustic substances to provide photo identification and sign a log…The law came about after two Illinois women were burned by acid attacks back in 2008. One of the women later admitted to burning herself with acid, but the law was still pushed through…so, because of one random crime where acid was used to burn a victim, thousands of people will be forced to show identification when they purchase drain cleaners, and countless hours of business time will be spent filling out, maintaining and monitoring the government mandated forms associated with each purchase.

The law creates good government jobs, creating and reading forms and prosecuting those who fail to file the proper forms! But shouldn’t the DOJ be suing Illinois, since the law is discriminatory? Wait a second, that lawsuit creates good government jobs too for the lawyers on both sides. Hmmm. Maybe photo ID’s should be required for every commercial transaction in the United States. Unemployment could be completely eliminated, right?

The big money Republican establishment was behind Bush because they feared that Reagan was too radical to win, and would carry the entire party down to historic defeat, like Goldwater did. Reagan even lost Iowa to Bush on that argument. But Reagan carried forward the pro-growth economic message that ultimately swept him to the nomination, and then to landslide victory in the fall, his coattails handing the Republicans control of the Senate, and effective control of the House.

After two Reagan landslide wins, it took George Bush just one term to trash the Reagan coalition, crawling out of town in 1992 with just 38% of the vote, barely better than Alf Landon in 1936…Since 1896, only Republicans who have campaigned on a pro-growth platform have been elected. Mitt Romney, instead of being the most electable, is firmly in the tradition of Thomas Dewey, Jerry Ford, Bob Dole, and John McCain.

Hmmm. Very interesting historical analogies, but how about Nixon versus McGovern in the election of 1972 with McGovern as the incumbent. What a thought! And here’s Sean Trende’s interesting analysis.

In 2009, the net worth of households headed by adults ages 65 and older was a record 47 times that of households headed by adults under the age of 35 — a wealth gap that doubled just since 2005. The equalizing effects of redistributive transfer payments are less today than in 1979, when households in the lowest income quintile received 54 percent of such payments. In 2007, they received 36 percent.

It’s as though we have an intergenerational Treaty of Versailles, and the young are stuck with the war reparations. The problem is: there aren’t enough of the young to do so. Trouble ahead.

The drawdown is not occurring in a vacuum, but is the bookend of a loud new ‘reset’ / ‘lead from behind’ strategy that deprecates traditional allies like Britain and Israel while failing miserably in outreach to supposedly new neutrals like Syria and Iran — all in a landscape of bowing, apologizing, and Cairo speechifying. All of these developments serve as force multipliers to the military retrenchment and confirm the impression of our enemies that the world is now entirely negotiable in a way not true four years ago.

The unspoken irony is that the military and our anti-terrorism protocols served Obama well when he arrived: he found a quiet Iraq with almost no monthly American casualties, a decimated al Qaeda (largely destroyed in Iraq), anti-terrorism measures that had foiled over 30 plots against the mainland (and were all demagogued by candidate Obama before President Obama embraced them), major powers like China, Russia, and Iran wary of pressing the U.S., allies like Japan, Taiwan, Germany, and South Korea secure under the U.S. nuclear umbrella, and the most seasoned and experienced U.S. military in generations…

The new $500 billion cuts must be considered against the nearly $5 trillion Obama has borrowed since assuming office, in addition to what he will borrow this next year. A defense budget that was tolerable prior to 2008 becomes apparently unsustainable with expenditures for Obamacare, vast new green projects like Solyndra, expansions in food stamps and unemployment insurance, and vast increases in the size of the non-military federal government. At least with the military our money earns safety and deterrence

The college professor continues his work. It’s as though the country elected not Jimmy Carter, but George McGovern. In any event the choice couldn’t be clearer this year. An America that might choose a McGovern administration is both unfathomable to us and, sadly, possible.

out of the blue Wednesday, came a tiny incident. A minute moment. There had been no signs of trouble, nothing to reveal that the Real Good Talker’s real good talking had lost his touch or control of his sitting subjects. The rest of the speech continued normally. Many there probably didn’t even notice. The president of the United States has said the next line so many times over these 1,080 days of his reign. He says it as a kind of democratic gesture, a compliment to a crowd of American citizens, a public obeisance that the most powerful man in the world is profoundly connected to them. Obama said, “You inspire me.” And you know how the members of that crowd in the most Democratic district of Ohio responded to that campaigning Democratic president’s professed sincerity this time? They laughed at him.

We’ve been told by our leftish political reporter acquaintances that while John Edwards’ Two Americas speech sounded great the first time, after a few times of listening to a PI lawyer give his sincere-sounding summation for the jury, their eyes would begin to roll. They were wise to his act and they’d begin to mimic and mock Edwards’ practiced cadences and faux-emotional pauses. Now there’s another guy that everybody’s heard one too many times.

Franklin D. Roosevelt…served seven years as Assistant Secretary of the Navy during the Wilson administration and four years as Governor of New York. But many considered him a lightweight, profiting on the fact that he was a distant cousin (his wife Eleanor was a closer cousin) of Theodore Roosevelt, a president considered great enough at that time to be worthy of being depicted on Mount Rushmore and the winner of the largest percentage of the popular vote for president of any candidate between 1820 and 1920. Theodore Roosevelt had written several impressive books (his account of the naval War of 1812 is still considered authoritative) before he was elected president and had resigned as Assistant Secretary of the Navy to serve in combat in the Spanish American war at age 39. Franklin Roosevelt had written no books before 1932 and had stayed in the same civilian post rather than enlist at 38 when the United States entered World War I.

Franklin Roosevelt was the Democratic vice presidential nominee in 1920 when the ticket lost by a 60%-34% margin to the Republican ticket of Warren G. Harding and Calvin Coolidge, and Roosevelt nearly lost the 1928 governor election to Republican Albert Ottinger. Few journalists espied greatness in him. He was “Roosevelt Minor” to Mencken, who wrote, “No one, in fact, really likes Roosevelt, not even his ostensible friends, and no one quite trusts him.” Walter Lippmann, who supported the Democratic party as editorial page editor of the New York World in the 1920s, and who had known Roosevelt for more than a dozen years, described him as “a pleasant man who, without any important qualifications for the office, would very much like to be president”…

The 2012 Republican field does indeed look weak, at a time of great opportunity for the party. But so did the 1932 Democratic field. We can try to learn as much about these candidates as we can, but we cannot foresee the future. We must hope that at least one of these candidates turns out to have greater strengths and virtues than are now apparent. It’s happened before.

We understand that Mitt Romney won in Iowa by 8 votes, at least as of this writing. Meanwhile, “43% of Likely U.S. Voters would vote for the Republican in their district’s congressional race if the election were held today, while 38% would choose the Democrat instead.” We continue to have the feeling that, although the GOP generally seems to be well positioned, and the conventional wisdom is now that Romney is the odds on favorite to be the nominee, some enormous surprises lie ahead. We’ll see.

requiring a high school diploma from a job applicant might violate the Americans with Disabilities Act…The “informal discussion letter” from the EEOC said an employer’s requirement of a high school diploma, long a standard criterion for screening potential employees, must be “job-related for the position in question and consistent with business necessity”…Employers could run afoul of the ADA if their requirement of a high school diploma “‘screens out’ an individual who is unable to graduate because of a learning disability

Fortunately there’s “not a single shred of evidence” that government regulations are harmful.

today’s tea party is less an ideological movement than the latest incarnation of an angry white minority — predominantly Southern, mainly rural, largely male — that has repeatedly attacked American democracy while trying to get its way. It’s no coincidence that the states responsible for putting the most tea party representatives in the House are the former members of the Confederacy. Others are from border states with significant Southern populations and Southern ties. This “no-compromise” right wing of today’s GOP isn’t much different from the evangelical social conservatives who began asserting themselves in the party during the 1990s and, before them, the “Willie Horton” conservatives of the 1980′s…America has had a long history of white Southerners who will stop at nothing to get their way: seceding from the Union in 1861, refusing to obey civil rights legislation in the 1960s

The worthies of the left actually believe this. It’s very peculiar after all this time that they continue to do so. The Telegraph attended one of the angry mob scenes. So did Glenn Reynolds. And of course there’s that noted Southern rural redneck Rick Santelli. And the “angry white men” that Reich imagines, um, they’re reportedly more than half women.

Columbia University is offering a new course on Occupy Wall Street next semester — sending upperclassmen and grad students into the field for full course credit. The class is taught by Dr. Hannah Appel, who boasts about her nights camped out in Zuccotti Park. As many as 30 students will be expected to get involved in ongoing OWS projects outside the classroom, the syllabus says. The class will be in the anthropology department and called “Occupy the Field: Global Finance, Inequality, Social Movement.” It will be divided between seminars at the Morningside Heights campus and fieldwork.

From the Committee on Global Thought, Columbia University:

Hannah Appel earned her Ph.D. in the Department of Anthropology at Stanford University. With research interests in the daily life of capitalism and the private sector in Africa, in particular, Hannah’s work draws on critical development studies, economic anthropology, and political economy. Her current project — Futures — is baded on fourteen months of ethnographic fieldwork in the transnational oil and gas industry in Equatorial Guinea. The project explores the considerable work required to lubricate the passage of oil to market – not only of labor (whether manual, managerial, or domestic,) but also of material infratstructures, contracting regimes, and forms of governance and regulation. What combinations of technopolitics, labor, infrastructure, contracts and subcontracts, corporate enclaves and corporate social responsibility programs are required to convert Equatorial Guinea’s hydrocarbon from subsea deposit to spot price on the New York Mercantile Exchange? And to what effect?

Is this guy, a Columbia grad student, going to help teach the course?

Fisker Automotive is recalling all 239 of its 2012 Karma luxury plug-in hybrid cars because of a fire hazard, according to a report filed with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. Prices on the 2012 model start at $103,000…the problem was discovered on Dec. 16, when workers at the Valmet Automotive assembly plant in Finland noticed coolant dripping…fewer than 50 vehicles were in the hands of consumers.

Hmmm. Made in Finland. Costs $100K. Nobody buys them. Hybrid that gets only 20mpg. Sets itself on fire. What could the punchline be? Some kind of joke about the USSR? No, sadly, the joke’s on all of us.

millions of Americans remain unaware that this nation is broke –- broker than any nation has ever been. A few days before Christmas, we sailed across the psychological Rubicon and joined the club of nations whose government debt now exceeds their total GDP. It barely raised a murmur -– and those who took the trouble to address the issue noted complacently that our 100 percent debt-to-GDP ratio is a mere two-thirds of Greece’s. That’s true, but at a certain point per capita comparisons are less relevant than the sheer hard dollar sums: Greece owes a few rinky-dink billions; America owes more money than anyone has ever owed anybody ever.

Public debt has increased by 67 percent over the past three years, and too many Americans refuse even to see it as a problem. For most of us, “$16.4 trillion” has no real meaning, any more than “$17.9 trillion” or “$28.3 trillion” or “$147.8 bazillion.” It doesn’t even have much meaning…there is no politically plausible scenario under which the 16.4 trillion is reduced to 13.7 trillion, and then 7.9 trillion and, eventually, 173 dollars and 48 cents…

Our most enlightened citizens think it’s rather vulgar and boorish to obsess about debt. The urbane, educated, Western progressive would rather “save the planet,” a cause which offers the grandiose narcissism that, say, reforming Medicare lacks. So, for example, a pipeline delivering Canadian energy from Alberta to Texas is blocked by the president on no grounds whatsoever except that the very thought of it is an aesthetic affront to the moneyed Sierra Club types who infest his fundraisers. The offending energy, of course, does not simply get mothballed in the Canadian attic: The Dominion’s Prime Minister has already pointed out that they’ll sell it to the Chinese, whose Politburo lacks our exquisitely refined revulsion at economic dynamism and, indeed, seems increasingly amused by it…

Last January, the BBC’s Brian Milligan inaugurated the New Year by driving an electric Mini from London to Edinburgh, taking advantage of the many government-subsidized charge posts en route. It took him four days, which works out to an average speed of 6 miles per hour – or longer than it would have taken on a stagecoach in the mid-19th century. This was hailed as a great triumph by the environmentalists.

Steyn goes on to talk about the regulatory sclerosis that afflicts the country and is so evident over the march of decades. Of course it’s not all bleak. Some companies in the tech sector continue to show impressive growth. But the heavy lifting of massive job creation can’t occur unless government stops its spending binge and gets out of the way of business. 2013 can’t arrive fast enough.

Henry Miller reads from Black Spring. The narrator has been tasked with bringing his Aunt to the asylum:

It always seemed astounding to me how jolly they were in our family despite the calamities that were always threatening. Jolly in spite of everything. There was cancer, dropsy, cirrhosis of the liver, insanity, thievery, mendacity, buggery, incest, paralysis, tapeworms, abortions, triplets, idiots, drunkards, n’er-do-wells, fanatics, sailors, tailors, watchmakers, scarlet fever, whooping cough, meningitis, running ears, chorea, stutterers, jailbirds, dreamers, storytellers, bartenders — and finally there was Uncle George and Tante Melia. The morgue and the insane asylum.

No one knew that Tante Melia was going completely off her nut, that when we reached the corner she would leap forward like a reindeer and bite a piece out of the moon. And nobody could think quick enough to stop it. Just like that it happened. In the twinkle of a star. And now I’m going to tell you what those bastards said to me…

They said — Henry, you take her to the asylum tomorrow. And don’t tell them that we can afford to pay for her. Fine! Always merry and bright! The next morning we boarded the trolley together and we rode out into the country. If Mele asked where we were going I was to say – “to visit Aunt Monica.” But Mele didn’t ask any questions. She sat quietly beside me and pointed to the cows now and then. She saw blue cows and green ones. She knew their names. She asked what happened to the moon in the daytime. And did I have a piece of liverwurst by any chance?

During the journey I wept — I couldn’t help it. When people are too good for this world they have to be put under lock and key. There’s something wrong with people who are too good. It’s true Mele was lazy. She was born lazy. It’s true that she was a poor housekeeper. It’s true she didn’t know how to hold on to a husband when they found her one. When Paul ran off with the woman from Hamburg she just sat in a corner and wept. The others wanted her to do something — put a bullet into him, raise a rumpus, sue for alimony. But Mele sat quiet. She wept. She hung her head. She was like a pair of torn socks that are kicked around here, there, everywhere. Always turning up at the wrong moment.

And now she’s very tranquil and she calls the cows by their first name. The moon fascinates her. She has no fear because I’m with her and she always trusted me. I was her favorite. Even though she was a halfwit she was good to me. The others were more intelligent, but their hearts were bad.

Sometimes when she was fired from a job they used to send me to fetch her. Mele never knew her way home. And I remember how happy she was whenever she saw me coming. She would say innocently that she wanted to stay with us. Why couldn’t she stay with us? I used to ask myself that over and over. Why couldn’t they make a place for her by the fire, let her sit there and dream, if that’s what she wanted to do? Why must everybody work -– even the saints and the angels? Why must halfwits set a good example? I’m thinking now that after all it may be good for Mele where I’m taking her. No more work. Just the same, I’d rather they had made a corner for her somewhere.

Walking down the gravel path toward the big gates Mele becomes uneasy. Even a puppy knows when it is being carried to a pond to be drowned.

Henry Miller was born in 1891. He lived in a far-off age in America when everyone knew farmers and soldiers. He lived through the first part of the greatest economic and industrial transformation in the history of the world. By the time there was news on the radio, he was in his late 20s. Stardust and White Christmas are bookends to the decade in which he wrote Black Spring in Paris.

And here we are today at the end of 2011. Is the country better or worse off? Of course materially much better off — but consider Miller’s first paragraph above. Look at how robust that writing is and how much our discourse has been dumbed down, self-censored, and made purposefully vague today. Here’s to better luck in 2012! HT: MS

Addendum: China is about 100 years behind the USA’s trends in urbanization and agricultural employment. They’re about where we were at the start of WWI, with some notable differences due to technology. Given the vast changes that have taken place and the vast changes that lie ahead, it’s hard to imagine where this country and China will be in another century.

The Guardian’s front-page headline this morning was ‘NHS cuts have affected patient care say four out of five doctors’. So just how severe are these ‘cuts’? Ten per cent of the budget? Five? Here are the official figures from the Department of Health. At a time when other ministries are indeed under pressure, spending on the NHS will continue to grow year on year throughout the parliament – as it has almost uninterruptedly since 1948. Expenditure will rise from £103.8 billion to £114.4 billion in 2015. It’s true that, once inflation is factored in, the increase is slight – around 0.4 per cent. It’s true, too, that there is a reallocation of funds within that budget from administration to the actual provision of healthcare. Still, in no system of mathematics does this represent a ‘cut’. What, then, is the Guardian talking about? Read far enough and you’ll see that the whole story is based an online survey of, er, 664 self-selected respondents

Middle East Forum:

Consider the New York Times’ coverage, as reported by Adam Nossiter, in an article titled “Nigerian Group Escalates Violence With Church Attacks”: The sect, known as Boko Haram, until now mostly targeted the police, government and military in its insurgency effort, but the bombings on Sunday represented a new, religion-tinged front, a tactic that threatens to exploit the already frayed relations between Nigeria’s nearly evenly split populations of Christians and Muslims…

This sentence is fraught with problems. For starters, Boko Haram has been terrorizing Nigerian Christians for years, killing thousands of them, and destroying hundreds of their churches. Considering that just last Christmas Eve, 2010, Boko Haram bombed several churches, killing nearly 40 Christian worshippers, the New York Times’ characterization of these latest attacks as “represent[ing] a new, religion-tinged front” is not only unconscionable, but unprofessional.

Boko Haram — whose full name in Arabic is “People of Sunna for Da’wa [Islamization] and Jihad [Holy War]” — has, for a decade, been representing a very “religion-tinged front,” that is, an Islamic front, one that is hostile to all things non-Muslim, with Christians at the very top. In just the last couple of months, Boko Haram has carried out attacks on dozens of other churches, bombing some, torching others. In one instance, they opened fire on a congregation of mostly women and children, killing dozens; they executed two children of an ex-terrorist because he converted to Christianity

A cut is properly defined as an inadequate increase. A clear religious-political strategy of violence is properly defined an unfortunate religion-tinged tactic that might result in some random man-caused disasters. What about clear writing don’t these whiners understand?

You need a photo ID to get on an airplane or an Amtrak train; to open a bank account, withdraw money from it, or cash a check; to pick up movie and concert tickets; to go into a federal building; to buy alcohol and to apply for food stamps. Most Americans don’t think it’s a hardship to ask voters to produce one. A Rasmussen poll in June indicated 75 percent of respondents support photo ID requirements…

Republicans “want to literally drag us back to Jim Crow laws,” said Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz, D-Fla, chair of the Democratic National Committee. The NAACP has asked the United Nations to intervene to block state voter ID laws. It may have an ulterior motive for opposing ballot security measures. An NAACP official was convicted on 10 counts of absentee voter fraud in Tunica County, Miss., in July…

This year there have been investigations, indictments or convictions for vote fraud in California, Texas, Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Indiana, Ohio, Georgia, North Carolina and Maryland. In all but one case, the alleged fraudsters were Democrats…

At least 55 employees or associates of the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now have been convicted of registration fraud in 11 states, says Matthew Vadum of the Capital Research Center, who’s written a book about ACORN. Of 1.3 million new registrations ACORN turned in in 2008, election officials rejected 400,000.

What a waste of four years. The cling to power re-election strategy is to suppress attempts to enforce laws, and accuse the law enforcers of vile motivations. Hint: implicitly calling 75% of Americans names is not a sound strategy, even with the media on your side.

What a waste of four years. Economically, the administration has pursued a relentlessly disciplined agenda that is economically destructive. But in many ways, that’s not the worst of it. The country has a bad case of moral rot, and while there’s not much a president can do about that directly, he can certainly use the bully pulpit to advantage. Or not.

A man was given a great opportunity and squandered it. Oddly enough, it was the opportunity he campaigned on four years ago, but all that was just words. The largest irony is that the facts on the ground offered any number of opportunities for distinction if not greatness, but we’d bet that the administration’s senior team is so blinkered by ideology that they only saw their distorted version of the American reality.

the CDC reported that about 40% of American children were born out of wedlock in 2007, more than triple the 11% who were in 1970. This means that more than 1.7 million children were born outside of marriage in 2007. Moreover, the vast majority of these babies — 60%, to be precise — were born not to teenagers but to women in their 20s (only 23% of nonmarital births were to teens). Furthermore, the CDC reports that nonmarital childbearing has been rising much faster among adults than among teenagers.

None of this should come as a surprise, given that a 2003 Gallup Survey found that 64% of young adults age 18 to 29 thought that having a baby out of wedlock was “morally acceptable.” But a number of academics and advocates who track family issues are more than willing to provide intellectual cover to contemporary young adults’ laissez-faire approach to childbearing and marriage. For instance, Stephanie Coontz, the director of research at the Council on Contemporary Families, wrote on the New York Times “Room for Debate” blog that “policymakers and researchers need to discard one-size-fits-all generalizations about the causes, consequences, risks and benefits of different family forms. Average outcomes from married and single parenting hide huge variations” in child well-being. Likewise, Silvia Henriquez, the executive director of the National Latina Institute for Reproductive Health, urged readers to resist the temptation to “present single motherhood as a problem in itself.”

Ultimately, though, the arguments put forward by Ms. Coontz, Ms. Henriquez and other academics and advocates do not have science on their side. For instance, Sara McLanahan at Princeton University and her colleagues have found that boys who are raised by single mothers are twice as likely to end up in prison by age 32, that girls who are born outside of marriage are three times as likely to have a teenage pregnancy, and that teens born outside of marriage are about twice as likely to drop out of high school

It’s amusing when the usual suspects say nonsense: “policymakers and researchers need to discard one-size-fits-all generalizations about the causes, consequences, risks and benefits of different family forms.” Amusing but a 40% illegitimacy rate is no laughing matter. We wonder what contemporary artists think about this. (Haven’t we written this before?) Look no further than here, here, or perhaps most symbolically, here. A serious teaching moment squandered.

Between 1984 and 2009, the median net worth of a member of the House has risen 2.5 times, according to the analysis of financial disclosures, rising from $280,000 to $725,000…All figures have been adjusted for inflation and exclude home equity, which is not included in congressional reporting

This increase does not include what happens when they quit and become lobbyists, or go back to their home states and practice law. It also doesn’t include pension benefits, payable at age 62 to a member with 5 years in Congress. Nice racket.

A Czech national was nabbed in Argentina for trying to board a transatlantic flight with 247 live animals including poisonous snakes and endangered reptiles packed in a bulging suitcase, reports said Monday. The man identified as Karel Abelovsky, 51, was caught while trying to board a flight for Madrid when shocked baggage X-ray technicians and staff at the Iberia Airlines desk at Ezeiza Airport in greater Buenos Aires noticed “organic substances moving inside,” local media reported.

When they opened the bag, they found more than 200 reptiles and mollusks, among them nine species of poisonous snakes including South American pitvipers, packed in clear plastic containers. There were also 15 venomous vipers, including two yararas — which can measure up to 1.50 meters (five feet) — and several young boas.

A similarly dangerous situation developed in the USA, but fortunately the TSA seized the cupcake.

A woman who just flew back home from Las Vegas says an airport security officer confiscated her frosted cupcake because he thought the icing on it could be a security risk. Rebecca Hains said the Transportation Security Administration agent at McCarran International Airport took her cupcake Wednesday, telling her its frosting was enough like a gel to violate TSA restrictions on allowing liquids and gels onto flights to prevent them from being used as explosives. She said the agent told her the frosting was conforming to the jar it was inside.

Read more: http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2011/12/23/20111223massachusetts-woman-says-tsa-agent-confiscated-cupcake.html#ixzz1kxVbW0Wa

Our company, CKE Restaurants Inc., employs about 21,000 people (our franchisees employ 49,000 more) in Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s restaurants. For months, we have been working with Mercer Health & Benefits LLC, our health-care consultant, to identify Obamacare’s potential financial impact on CKE. Mercer estimated that when the law is fully implemented our health-care costs will increase about $18 million a year. That would put our total health-care costs at $29.8 million, a 150 percent increase from the roughly $12 million we spent last year.

The money to cover our increased expenses will have to come from somewhere. We are a profitable company and, after paying our obligations, we reinvest our earnings in the business. Reinvesting in the business is how we grow, create jobs and opportunity. This is true for most U.S. businesses…

To offset higher health-care expenses, we will have to cut spending on new restaurant construction, one of our largest discretionary spending areas. But building new restaurants is how we create jobs. An $18 million increase in our costs would more than consume the $8.8 million we spent on new restaurant construction last year, leaving nothing for growth. We will also need to reduce our general capital spending, which also creates jobs and allows us to improve our infrastructure and maintain our business. In summary, our ability to create new jobs could vanish.

To reduce the financial impact of Obamacare, many businesses, including ours, will have to consider increasing the number of part-time employees (those who work less than 30 hours a week as defined under the health-care law) and reducing the number of full-time employees. So, some individuals seeking full-time work will need to find two jobs…

The complexity of this legislation makes it hard to anticipate costs in the future. Our investments pay off — when they are successful — over the long term. Because we don’t know what our health-care expenses will be in two or three years, we are unable to determine with any certainty how much our investments will have to return for us to be profitable. All of that counsels in favor of holding off on new investments and saving our funds. We want to grow. But we are unable to do so knowing that large and undetermined liabilities will absorb funds we otherwise would invest for expansion.

My testimony was followed by that of Grady Payne, chief executive officer of Connor Industries Inc., a supplier of cut lumber and assembled wood products for shipping and crating needs. Based in Fort Worth, Texas, it has plants and employees in eight states and employs 450 people. He laid out the options open to his company under the health-care law, each of which would cost $1 million or more. According to Payne, that amount is “more than the company makes.” He concluded that his company’s goals have turned “from ‘hire-and-grow’ to ‘cut-and-survive.’”

Victoria Braden, the president and CEO of Braden Benefits Strategies Inc., a corporate employee-benefits adviser based in Johns Creek, Georgia, also testified. She said adoption of the law led to immediate job cuts at her company

Gosh, what a concept, what you tax you get less of. Who would’ve thought? And the jobs that CKE will be adding will be in Texas rather than in California.

When the Journal/NBC News poll last month asked Americans who they think is most to blame for current economic problems, both former President Bush and Wall Street bankers were fingered more often than was President Obama. That attitude gives some resonance to Mr. Obama’s argument — already oft-stated and sure to be repeated a lot in the campaign to come — that the Republican administration of George W. Bush allowed the country to fall into a deep economic ditch, and that it isn’t Mr. Obama’s fault it’s taking a long time to climb out. Second, whatever unhappiness exists with Mr. Obama’s economic record, there is ample reason to think Republicans are even less popular. Just over 40% of Americans have an unfavorable view of the president, but 48% hold an unfavorable view of Republicans.

We don’t claim to know what the electoral future holds, but basing opinions on GIGO polling data is ludicrous. The poll is 1000 adults, almost 20% of whom aren’t even registered to vote. The 2008 results of those who voted in the presidential election were 4/3 D/R , which is way out of line with the actual tally.

Finally, the D-to-R self-identification in the poll is 46-36 (including leaners), way out of line with the 35-35 actual results from exit polling. Weighting leaners so heavily D is clearly misleading since I’s flipped 33 points D-to-R in the most recent elecrtion. Are the people who write this nonsense lazy or complicit?

From 1960 to 2010, the share of federal spending going for “payments to individuals” (Social Security, food stamps, Medicare and the like) climbed from 26 percent to 66 percent…

falling military spending — from 52 percent of federal outlays in 1960 to 20 percent today…

In 1960, federal taxes were 17.8 percent of national income (gross domestic product). In 2007, they were 18.5 percent of GDP…

the Forbes 400 richest Americans have a collective wealth of $1.5 trillion. If the government simply confiscated everything they own, and turned them into paupers, it would barely cover the one-time 2011 deficit of $1.3 trillion…

Obama has provided no leadership. Aside from Rep. Paul Ryan, chairman of the House Budget Committee, few Republicans have.

It looks like Mr. Samuelson is writing a contemporary history of America’s financial Armageddon. He has already done the chapter comparing US debt levels to those of the PIIGS. He’s already done the chapter on the ruinous healthcare law, though he was careful to put his criticism in the third person. His criticism of politicians is bi-partisan, but it seems clear enough that he has stronger feelings than he is willing to share in print.

1968 was a tumultuous year, really awful in some ways, hardly what you’d call the good old days. Yet it had its moments, including the first human spaceflight to leave the earth’s orbit. Merry Christmas from the three astronauts of the Apollo 8 mission.

The key to understanding the impact of taxes on the economy is to focus on tax rates, particularly marginal tax rates, defined as the tax rate that applies to the last dollar earned. The tax rate determines how much the producer is allowed to keep out of what he or she produces. For example, at a 25% tax rate, the producer keeps three-fourths of his production. If that rate is increased to 50%, the producer keeps only half of what he produces, reducing his reward for production and output by one-third. Incentives are consequently slashed for productive activity, such as saving, investment, work, business expansion, business creation, job creation, and entrepreneurship. The result is fewer jobs, lower wages, and slower economic growth, or even economic downturn.

In contrast, if the tax rate is reduced from 50% to 25%, what producers are allowed to keep from their production increases from one-half to three-fourths, increasing the reward for production and output by one-half. That sharply increases incentives for all of the above productive activities, resulting in more of them, and more jobs, higher wages, and faster economic growth. Moreover, these incentives do not just expand or contract the economy by the amount of any tax cut or tax increase, as a Keynesian stimulus purports to do. For example, a tax cut of $100 billion involving reduced tax rates does not just affect the economy by $100 billion. The lower tax rates affect every dollar and every economic decision throughout the economy. That is because every economic decision is based on the new lower tax rates…

Similarly, regulations impose increased costs on businesses and consumers, and sometimes flat out prohibit productive economic activity altogether. See, e.g., the Keystone pipeline. Academic studies estimate the total costs of regulation in the economy to be rapidly rising towards $2 trillion per year, or $8,000 per employee. That is close to 10 times the corporate income tax burden, and double the individual income tax. When the resulting effects on the economy are considered, the total losses due to regulatory burdens may total $3 trillion, or one fifth of our entire economy.

These regulatory burdens increase the cost of production, and consequently reduce the net return to the producers, reducing the reward for production quite similarly to taxes. They consequently also slash the incentive for production, reducing economic growth and prosperity. Alternatively, reducing regulatory burdens reduces the cost of production, increasing the net return to producers, and so adds to the incentives for production. The result is increased economic growth and prosperity…

These pro-growth, free market economic policies are the opposite of trickle down economics. They all involve decentralized markets, with prosperity welling up from the people to create a rich and prosperous nation.

We left out the partisan elements of Ferrara’s piece. What’s the point? Go into any faculty lounge in one of our top 50 universities, pick out a humanities professor at random, put him in the Oval Office, and you’d get pretty much what we’ve got now in terms of policy views. Add some Chicago-way thuggishness, and you have as bad a situation as the country has faced in many decades. WFB said “I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University.” He didn’t know the half of it.

In Montana’s Finley Basin there are known tungsten deposits. An Australian company wanted to bring revenue and jobs to the state by developing the resource. While the property was successfully drilled and recognized by Union Carbide in the seventies, it is now about 200 yards inside a roadless study area. The Forest Service was willing to offer a conditional drilling permit. Among the conditions were these requirements:

– The drill sites must be cleared using hand tools,
– The drilling equipment and fuel must be transported to the site by a team of pack mules,
– The mules must be fed certified weed-free hay, and
– Drill site and trail reclamation must be done using hand tools.

The company gave up. How can America remain competitive in a global marketplace when we are required to use pick axes and mules? How does this help America’s heavy equipment manufacturers like Caterpillar?

Everyone involved in this decision-making process should be terminated 1/21/13. They can stand in the unemployment line with the FTC employees who spend their time investigating Chuck E. Cheese.

A federal judge on Friday barred the NYC’s Taxi and Limousine Commission from issuing permits for taxicabs…Judge George Daniels said in his written ruling that the commission can provide taxi medallions only for wheelchair-accessible vehicles until it produces a comprehensive plan to provide meaningful access to taxicab service for disabled passengers. He said such a plan must include targeted goals and standards and anticipated measurable results. “Meaningful access for the disabled to public transportation services is not a utopian goal or political promise, it is a basic civil right,” the judge wrote.

There are 1.7MM wheelchair users in the country, mostly located in the South and West, and mostly in rural areas. That’s about 0.006 of the population. We couldn’t find out how many are in NYC, even from disabled advocacy groups, so no doubt the number is even smaller than the 0.006 nationally. But it’s even worse than the AP story implies. WSJ:

about 2% of New York City’s roughly 13,000 yellow taxis have equipment that allows wheelchair users to get in and out. The Justice Department said the likelihood of a nondisabled person hailing a cab within 10 minutes is 87%, compared with just 3% for a disabled person.

All NYC buses are wheelchair-enabled, and so are 230 cabs (the MV-1 retails for about $40,000, weighs about 5,000 pounds and gets 13-15 miles per gallon). But waiting times are too long for a cab. So the legal machinery of the federal government spent millions of dollars to sue another government, both sides of which argument were taxpayer funded. If you think this is a good use of your taxes, well, good luck to you. HT: PW

The Justice Department on Friday rejected South Carolina’s law requiring voters to show photo identification at the polls, saying it makes it harder for minorities to cast ballots. It was the first voter ID law to be refused by the federal agency in nearly 20 years…”Minority registered voters were nearly 20 percent more likely to lack DMV-issued ID than white registered voters, and thus to be effectively disenfranchised,” Perez wrote, noting that the numbers could be even higher since the data submitted by the state doesn’t include inactive voters.

CNN:

A federal judge in Charleston, South Carolina blocked Thursday parts of the state’s anti-illegal immigration law approved by the legislature last summer…The first section blocked makes it a felony to transport or conceal a person “with intent to further that person’s unlawful entry into the United States” or to help that person avoid apprehension.

Campaign 2012. Attacking the rule of law on transparently flimsy grounds, and with such brass too. Pretty much what we predicted a year ago. In a way it’s not surprising, but in a way it’s shocking to see how far this country has fallen and so fast. (Imagine the kind of hope and change in store for the country 2013-2017 if these low lifes get away with this next November.)

Final points: (a) the opposition party is MIA on these outrages; and (b) the media, the media — the lead stories of the day are about a $20 a week tax cut for 8 weeks, and morons fighting over who gets to buy a pair of sneakers. A million Americans died in the nation’s wars for this?

When the EPA announced its new air pollution rules this week — designed to reduce power plant emissions of mercury and other to gases — Administrator Lisa Jackson blogged that: “Mercury is a neurotoxin that is particularly harmful to children, and emissions of mercury and other air toxics have been linked to damage to developing nervous systems, respiratory illnesses and other diseases.” At $10 billion a year, complying with the new rules won’t come cheap, and that assumes the EPA’s low-ball estimate comes true. According to the coal industry, this is the most expensive rule the EPA’s ever imposed.

For our part, we get our mercury from swordfish, about which the EPA also screams trouble. On the other hand, the EPA says that with mercury CFL’s “there is no evidence that the brief exposure to the mercury in a broken bulb presents a health risk to you.” Go figure. (The state of Maine begs to differ.)

BTW, both left and right, AEI and Brookings say that the $10 billion annual boondoggle by the EPA is totally unnecessary. Surprised?

Just about the only thing more ridiculous than this track record is the media’s track record of ignoring and covering up these appalling performances.

The ECB has drastically lowered its standards for the collateral it accepts for these loans, so banks get to offload some very risky assets. The cash they’ll receive will generate a superficial improvement for banks — cash is considered the least risky asset to hold. But to move beyond a temporary solution banks have to lend the cash out in order to generate earnings. The cash itself would not earn enough interest to repay the 1 percent rate on the loans.

One of the most talked-about options for generating profits would be buying more European government bonds. European politicians and other advocates of this plan paint it as a win-win scenario. Banks generate earnings by purchasing higher yielding sovereign debt, such as Spain’s or Italy’s

So the ECB is accepting compromised collateral, possibly at par, and may encourage the banks to buy even more compromised debt. That’ll work! We flash back three years to the dark days of late 2008. The de-leveraging process still has a long way to go, and the can is still being kicked down the road.

banks snapped up €489 billion ($639 billion) in cheap loans from the European Central Bank on Wednesday, a sign of just how hard or expensive it has become to borrow from each other. The huge demand for newly available three-year loans comes as fears rise that heavily indebted European governments could default and force banks and other bond holders to take big losses…

The loans to 523 banks surpassed the €442 billion ($578 billion) in one-year loans extended in June 2009, when the global financial system was reeling from the collapse of the U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers. It was the biggest ECB infusion of credit into the banking system in the 13-year history of the euro. The ECB wants banks to use the money to help pay off or refinance some €230 billion ($300 billion) in existing loans early in 2012…

it was far higher than the €300 billion ($392 billion) expected…”The good news is, the ECB’s efforts to increase liquidity are working,” said Jennifer Lee, an analyst at BMO Capital Markets. “The bad news is, high demand for the loans creates worries that banks are urgently in need of funds to boost liquidity.”

Let’s do some arithmetic. Much of the €489 billion goes to refinance some €230 billion coming due next month. So there’s €259 billion of net additional liquidity spread among 523 banks. Not that much on a per bank basis, but the largest amounts are no doubt concentrated in the largest institutions.

Still, this is a drop in the bucket, compared to some estimates of the needs of the banking system, and it does nothing at all to deal with the €2.6 trillion sovereign debt problem. Question: what happens when the debts begin to mature and liquidity starts coming out of the system?